-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
FINERACT-2382: Repayment schedule for Flat-Cumulative-Multi Disbursement #5070
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
FINERACT-2382: Repayment schedule for Flat-Cumulative-Multi Disbursement #5070
Conversation
1965256 to
2948d2a
Compare
7b36536 to
c4df868
Compare
| if (!intValue.equals(number)) { | ||
| String validationErrorCode = "validation.msg." + this.resource + "." + this.parameter + ".not.equal.to.specified.number"; | ||
| String defaultEnglishMessage = "The parameter `" + this.parameter + "` must be same as" + number; | ||
| String defaultEnglishMessage = "The parameter `" + this.parameter + "`must be same as " + number; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is a missing space before the word "must":
"The parameter " + this.parameter + "must be same as " + number;
It should be:
"The parameter " + this.parameter + " must be same as " + number;, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done! Space added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@alberto-art3ch I see a lot of tests were added and some validations were removed, but i dont see any changes in the business logic implementation. How this could be?
|
@alberto-art3ch Please rebase this PR. |
c4df868 to
40b175e
Compare
The validations were added in the past and now we don't need more, so those were removed, And the change was mainly in a method to apply the principal calculation. Finally the test were added just to validate the figures expected in the spreadsheet |
40b175e to
b4e278a
Compare
adamsaghy
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Description
Currently Fineract is not handling the Flat-Cumulative-Multi Disbursement configuration laan account schedule calculation correctly and has a validation at loan product level to not to allow multi disbursement if the calculation type is FLAT.
FINERACT-2382
Checklist
Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!
FYI our guidelines for code reviews are at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Code+Review+Guide.